24th November 2010, 09:25 PM
What's clearly needed is some mechanism for peer-review of the 'academic' content of commercial reporting? Currently it just gets passed or failed by a curator who very possibly doesn't have a PhD in whatever material you've just found. During a site meeting last week including a curator and the archaeological consultant it became immediately apparent that I was the only person there who knew anything at all about 11th century Norman castle ramparts, and short of me supplying them with a very long bibliography on the subject I'm guessing whatever I've said in the report will get passed through pretty much as written, whereas I'd actually welcome some input/peer-review from someone who knows more than me about such things (there must be someone out there)